When the United States government assigned responsibility for the so-called NotPetya cyberstrike in 2017 to Russia in 2018, insurers were provided with a justification for refusing to cover the damage, citing a common, but rarely used, clause in insurance contracts: the “war exclusion,” which protects insurers from being saddled with costs related to damage from war. Now, a number of legal fights will set a precedent about who pays when businesses are hit by a cyberattack blamed on a foreign government.
Read the article: The New York Times
